proceed with the proceedings so far as the remaining parties and part of the appeal is concerned. As and when it is found necessary to interfere with the judgment and decree challenged before it, the court can always declare the legal position in general and restrict the ultimate relief to be granted by confining it to those before the court only rather than denying the relief to one and all on account of a procedure lapse or action or inaction of one or the other of the parties before it. The only exception to this course of action should be where the relief granted and the decree ultimately passed would become totally unenforceable and mutually selfdestructive and unworkable vis-a-vis the other part, which had become final. As far as possible, courts must always aim to preserve and protect the rights of parties and extend help to enforce them rather than deny relief and thereby render the rights themselves otiose, “ubi jus remedium” (where there is a right, there is a remedy), being a basic principle of jurisprudence. It was a case where the appeal was filed by several appellants and during the pendency of the appeal some of the appellants had expired and the Court had ultimately held that when there are separate claims, having no conflicting interest inter se, jointly considered having regard to similarity of claims and a single judgment and decree passed, it would be treated as combination of several decrees
